Is the Injeel less or more trustworthy than the Quran?

The purpose of writing this second of a three-part response is to share with
my fellow Muslim brothers and sisters the discoveries I made regarding the trustworthiness of
the Injeel as compared to that of the Quran while I was contending with my faith in the 1980s.
During that time I was seeking to find the truth in defense of the Quran, and to prove the Injeel
corrupted. At that point in time, I restricted my study to the following three topics regarding
the Quran and the Injeel.

First, to understand what the Quran and the Injeel teach about what God says about
communicating and protecting his message.

Second, to investigate the history of how the early Quran and Injeel were compiled into
the books that became the authoritative collection of Gods message from Mohammad
and Isa.

Third, to review what scholars say about the transmission of the Quran and Injeel
manuscripts over the years, since their authoritative compilation.

In my previous response featured in the first part of this study I concluded
that Allah guaranteed the protection of all his messagesthe Quran as well as
the messages to prior prophets. Thus, Gods protection of his message was not unique
to the Quran. What I discovered was that no human can change the words of God. In addition,
nowhere did I find any strong sense from the Quran that the Jewish or Christian scriptures
had been corrupted, but only the charge that the Jews and Christians were hiding part of
the truth that was in their scriptures. Thus, based on the ayat (singular ayah 
means a sign or miracle, commonly a passage or verse) from the Quran and Injeel I reached
a place of understanding that Gods words are protected from change. For more details
on this, please refer to part one. Next on my list was to
investigate how the Quran and Injeel were compiled into authoritative manuscripts to reflect
what Mohammad and Isa had taught to be from God.

What process did the Quran go through to become an authoritative collection of
Gods message?

I was taught different stories of how the Quran was compiled. The two most
popular explanations were that Mohammad had compiled the Quran into a book before his death
and the other that Khalifa Abu Bakr had compiled it from men who had written it down and
memorized it. Regardless, I was taught that the Quran of today is exactly the same as that
which was given to Mohammad by the angel Gabriel. To that end, I started looking at the
authoritative Islamic sources  primarily the Sahih (authentic) Hadith (sayings and
deeds of Mohammad) compiled by Bukhari to understand this history.

As I studied the history of the compilation of the text of the Quran,
I was very surprised to learn that the Quran as we have it today went through many stages
of evolution before becoming standardized. For example I discovered that there was seven
different ways to recite the Quran. One could recite and memorize the Quran differently
and it was still acceptable as the word of Allah. Note from the Sahih Bukhari Hadith:

Volume 3, Book 41, Number 601: Narrated 'Umar bin Al-Khattab:I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way different to
that of mine. Allah's Apostle had taught it to me (in a different way). So, I was about
to quarrel with him (during the prayer) but I waited till he finished, then I tied his
garment round his neck and seized him by it and brought him to Allah's Apostle and said,
"I have heard him reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way different to the way you taught
it to me." The Prophet ordered me to release him and asked Hisham to recite it.
When he recited it, Allah s Apostle said, "It was revealed in this way."
He then asked me to recite it. When I recited it, he said, "It was revealed
in this way. The Quran has been revealed in seven different ways, so recite it
in the way that is easier for you."

Hence from the very onset of the Quran, I discovered that there were
different ways to recite it. For this reason, there was no one-way to memorize the Quran
but seven. That meant that different Muslims could memorize the Quran in seven different ways,
not one. At once, this provided a problem that I had not even considered, if Mohammad had
allowed seven ways to recite the Quran, then there should be seven versions of the Quran,
not one! I had not been taught of seven, but only of one Quran. Were there truly seven,
all of them equally authoritative? As I pressed on in my study, I discovered other Sahih Hadith
that substantiated and elaborated on this idea that the Quran may be recited in seven different
ways. For example Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 442;
V6, B61, N513; V6, B61, N514; V9, B93, N640 among others.

As I investigated further, the Sahih Hadith confirmed that Mohammad had
not compiled the text of the Quran into a single collection, but it was first done under
Khalifa Abu Bakrs reign. Apparently, it was at this time that the qurra, those who
had memorized the Quran, were being killed in the Battle of Yamama. Khalifa Abu Bakr ordered
a collection of the Quran to be made at the insistence of Umar (the second Khalifa). This
collection stayed with Khalifa Abu Bakr, then after his death with Khalifa Umar and then
it was passed on to Khalifa Umars daughter Hafsa, who also was one of
Mohammads widows. This is explained clearly in the Sahih Hadith of Bukhari:

Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509: Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people of Yamama had been killed (i.e.,
a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him)
and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me),
"Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra'
of the Quran (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yamama
and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other
battlefields, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost.
Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Quran be collected." I said to
'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said,
"By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his
proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea
which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and
we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for
Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Quran and
collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the
mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the
Quran. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did
not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept
on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the
chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Quran and collecting it from
(what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it
by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima
Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is: 'Verily there
has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you
should receive any injury or difficulty... (till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba)
(9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Quran remained with Abu Bakr till
he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of
'Umar.

As I studied the above Sahih Hadith and others similar to it, I noted some
important points. First, Umar was concerned that since a lot of the Quran was not written down,
if the Qurra died, much of the Quran would be lost. Second, this was a monumental task given
to Zaid as even Mohammad himself had not done this, and Zaid expresses this as a concern.
Third, there was much work to get this collection of the Quran compiled as some ayat were
only with one person and no one else to verify or substantiate it. There are others Sahih
Hadith that say much the same. The frankness of Zaid troubled me. Was it such a monumental
task and was he the right person to do it? I began searching and discovered that Mohammad
had recommended others and not Zaid to teach the Quran. From the Sahih Hadith:

I was very concerned that none of the four people that Mohammad had
recommended to teach the Quran were given the task for this compilation or confirmation;
but one of Mohammads scribes  Zaid bin Thabit. He too had concerns that this
job was too big. But yet neither Khalifa Abu Bakr nor Umar at that time chose to have his
work validated by any of them. I continued in my investigation rather perplexed that this
process of the compilation was a lot more involved than what I had been taught. Sadly, I
discovered the history of compilation did not end here. As the community of Muslims grew
and spread out, it became even harder to maintain the integrity of the Quranic text as
there was no single authoritative text, but different teachers had their own copy.
These challenges in the Quran resulted in many disagreements in the Muslim communities,
and as a result, Khalifa Uthman was asked to do something about it. Note that at this
point, the manuscript of the Quran that was compiled by Zaid was not in circulation, but
kept with Hafsa. Also note what Khalifa Uthman did as described in the following Sahih
Hadith of Bukhari.

Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510: Narrated Anas bin Malik:Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the
people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of
their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Quran, so he said
to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the
Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to
Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Quran so that we may compile the
Quranic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it
to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As
and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies.
'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on
any point in the Quran, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Quran was revealed in
their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned
the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what
they had copied, and ordered that all the other Quranic materials, whether written in
fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse
from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Quran and I used to hear Allah's
Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit
Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their
covenant with Allah.' (33.23)

Reviewing the above and other similar Sahih Hadith, I noted different
collections of the Quran were in circulation. These were partly the collection of the teachers
that Mohammad had recommended as discussed in the earlier Hadith, such as Kab. Again,
I was troubled with the following key points. First, there was much disagreement among the
Muslims as to what was in the Quran. Hence, because of the differences among them, Khalifa
Uthman ordered Hafsas manuscript to be copied and distributed and be made the
official Quran. Second, if there was a disagreement among the scribes who copied it as
to how to recite it, he ordered that it should be written in the Quraish dialect. I was
distressed to learn that Khalifa Uthman ordered the changing of the words of the Quran to
the Quraish dialect. Was this change part of the seven variations possible? I found no
mention of it in the Sahih Hadith. Last, I was shocked that Khalifa Uthman ordered the
destruction of all other Qurans  whether whole copies or in fragments. This was
very troubling. I wondered why? It had to be that the copies of the other Qurans then in
circulation were different enough for the Khalifa to order such a severe consequence for
them. Note the point Al-Yaman makes to Uthman, save the nation because they differ about
the Quran. Now Khalifa Uthman ordered the Hafsa copy, which was not even validated by the
best of teachers to become the official Quran.

As I started to investigate what might some of the differences be,
I found for example the missing Bismillah at the start of Surah 9, the missing stoning verse
regarding adultery, and other cancelled, withdrawn, abrogated or forgotten ayat. I have
discussed some of these in my study on abrogation. I discovered
that even though the order was given to destroy the other copies, some parts of those copies
have survived, possibly because Muslims had memorized other variations of the Quran. For
example, from Abdullah Yusuf Alis Quran translation and study notes I found another Qiraat
(recitation of the Quran), from Kab who Mohammad had recommended as one of the four best
to teach the Quran, had additional words for the Surah 33:6. I was taught not a single dot
was changed, and here was a whole phrase that is missing as noted with ** below in Abdullah
Yusuf Alis Study Note 3674.

The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves,**
and his wives are their mothers. Blood-relations among each other have closer personal ties,
in the Decree of Allah. Than (the Brotherhood of) Believers and Muhajirs: nevertheless do ye
what is just to your closest friends: such is the writing in the Decree (of Allah). Surah 33:6

** Note 3674 : In some Qiraats, like that of Ubai ibn Kab,
occur also the words "and he is a father to them", which imply his spiritual
relationship and connect on with the words "and his wives are their mothers".

This was not good news to me. No Muslim teacher had even hinted to this fact
that the final manuscript of the Quran that was ordered by Khalifa Uthman to be put in circulation
had such a history of challenges, changes and destruction.

Sadly, I reached a place of understanding regarding the compilation of the Quran
that

Mohammad had not compiled the Quranic material into a single Quran Manuscript.
He recommended four teachers to teach the Quranic material. He also confirmed
that the Quran could be recited in seven different ways.

Khalifa Abu Bakr ordered Zaid bin Thabit, one of the scribes, who was not one of the
four teachers Mohammad had recommended, to compile the Quranic material into one single
manuscript, when the qurra started to die in battle.

Within a few years, different versions of the Quran were in circulation, causing
problems among the Muslim community. Khalifa Uthman ordered the distribution of modified
copies of the Zaid bin Thabit version of the Quran that was with Khalifa Umars
daughter, Hafsa. He also ordered the destruction of all other Qurans that were compiled by
others.

Some Muslims have a problem with these conclusions as they believe this is not
what happened. However, the authoritative record we have in Islamic history is from the Sahih
Hadith, the Sirat (biography) of Mohammad and from the Tafsir (commentary) of the Quran.
There is no other historical Islamic source that can speak with authority on this topic.
From all of these sources, the testimony that comes across is the same as I have discussed
using the Sahih Hadith of Bukhari as my primary source. This is far from the perfect
authoritative compilation of the Quran I was taught we had directly from Mohammad.

What process did the Injeel go through to become an authoritative collection of
Gods message?

Next, I started to look at the compilation process of the Injeel. Here
I reflected on what I understood were two major issues with the Injeel as I was taught by
a number of Muslim teachers. First, that the different church councils had created the Injeel
hundreds of years later, and in the process had destroyed or ignored the true teachings of Isa.
Second, the Injeel has been corrupted by mixing of Gods words with mans and is
more like the Hadith, but without the proper Isnad or chain of reference of those who
conveyed the teaching. As proof that the Injeel was corrupted, I was told that even some
Christian scholars do not believe much of the Injeel. To that end, I started investigating
how true these claims were.

Unlike the Quran which is separated into 114 Surahs, I discovered that
the Injeel consists of four major segments: the gospels, historical writings, letters and
prophecy. In total there are 27 books, none of them written by Isa. Their authorship rests
with his apostles and their close associates. This initially was a big problem for me, but
after studying how the Quran was compiled under the supervision of the Khalifa, I was open
to the apostles doing the writing or teaching what Isa taught and close associates doing
the writing. That would be similar to the way the Quran was put to text. I also discovered
that of the 27 books of the Injeel, the 4 gospel books, book of Acts, and 15 letters of
Peter, John and Paul were widely used and quoted by the early Christian leaders before 70
AD, within 30 years after Isas ascension, while eye witness to these events were
still alive. These 20 books were all considered God inspired scripture by the Christian
community as the apostles did many miracles similar to those of Isa, thereby validating
their claim of being divinely inspired. There was much discussion of the remaining 7 books
which were the letters 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, James, Hebrews and Revelation. The
concerns surrounding these 7 books were mostly centered on doubts about the apostolic
authorship of these books. There were concerns that perhaps these books had been written
not by the apostles or their close associates, but by others who were not considered
authoritative sources.

As I started to investigate the history of the collection of the Injeel,
I did confirm that Isa did not finalize the Injeel, but the contents were by Isas apostles
and those closely associated with them. Christian history accounts claim that God inspired
Isas disciples to teach and write Isas words which are Gods words. This
claim is supported in the Injeel where Isa says that God would remind his disciples of all
the things he (Isa) had taught them while he was with them.

" and the word which you hear is not mine, but the Fathers
who sent me." John 14:24

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send
in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said
to you." John 14:26

A few years after Isas ascension into Heaven, the gospel accounts of Matthew,
Mark and Luke were in circulation while eyewitnesses were still alive. These were being used
along with the letters. Luke, a companion of the apostles describes his compilation.

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things
accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning
were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having
investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in
consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about
the things you have been taught. Luke 1:1-4

Later, John the apostle wrote in the Gospel that bears his name regarding
what Isa claimed above.

This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and wrote
these things, and we know that his testimony is true. John 21:24

Historical work done by many Christian and non-Christian scholars show
that many of the letters of Paul were written earlier than the four Gospel accounts. Paul was
considered an apostle and was accepted by other apostles of Isa as being divinely sanctioned
to teach the message of Isa. These letters were written soon after Isa had ascended and they
documented Isas teaching. My understanding from Muslim teachers was that Pauls
teaching was different than Isas and that the letters had been compiled in the
second century. Concerning Paul, I discovered that he subjected himself to the authority
of the other apostles and was validated by Peter and others that he was teaching the same
message. He also did many supernatural miracles in Isas name to validate this claim.
Regarding the claim by some that the compilation was done after the first century does not
have support because if that were the case, then critical events such as the death of the
apostle James in 62 AD, Paul in 64 AD, and Peter in 65 AD would have been recorded in the
book of Acts, which documents the teaching and work of these apostles. For example, we
know from the early history in Medina that Muslims were martyred in the battle of Uhud. As
that was during the time of the revelation of the Quran, it describes this event, but does
not document the later battles, such as Yamama because these wars were fought after the
Quran was revealed.

As I further studied the process the Christian community used to compile
the Injeel, I discovered that it was not a specific event such as what Khalifa Abu Bakr and
later Khalifa Uthman had done, but it was a gradual process done by the Christian community
over time. The Injeel was not set by a single Christian leader or council, rather, the books
in it were chosen because there was general acceptance that these books were written by the
apostles. The main criterion used was that the writings had to be written by one of the
apostles of Isa, or a close associate of the apostles or an eyewitness under supervision
of an apostle. The Christian community that witnessed the early events such as Isas
teaching, miracles, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, etc validated the writings in
the Injeel. Unlike in the case of the compilation of the Quran, where the Khalifas
authorized the compilation of the Quran, the early Christian community did not have such
a ruler to enforce such a compilation. Therefore during the first three centuries, the
Injeel survived because the Christians treated it as the word of God and held it in
reverence as such, even though during this time the Jewish and Roman authorities were
persecuting the Christians.

Finally, in the fourth century, Constantine, who was a Roman leader, became
a Christian. He initiated a number of councils, including the council at Nicea. At these
councils the central question regarding the Injeel was "what did Isa and the apostles
teach?" After studying and discussing the gospel books and letters, the leaders at
Nicea agreed to what was already in use. They did not select books based on their
preconceived ideas or theological position, but based on what was considered the word of
God and used as such through the previous three centuries. I also realized that unlike the
Quran where ayat were with different people, here whole books were selected, not partial
material from them. For example, the Christians for the past three centuries had only used
the four Gospels because the apostles wrote and gave them to the Christians in the first
century as the word of God. These were taken and a single Gospel was not created from the
four. As I investigated the historical record, I found no evidence for the destruction or
doctrinal modification of Gospels by Christians at Nicea or any of the other councils.
There was no way to change these as by this time the Injeel was translated from Greek into
many other languages including Syriac, Coptic, Latin, Gothic and Ethiopic. In addition,
not only were there the copies of the Injeel in many different languages, but many
Christian leaders had written and quoted from the Injeel during the first, second and
third centuries making it impossible to change the Injeel.

Looking further into the writings of the Christian leaders, I discovered
that they would quote from Injeel, but not from other writings that were not considered
the word of God as Isa had taught. One of the prominent church leaders, Ignatius of Antioch,
refers to the Gospels of Matthew and John possibly as early as 37 years after Isas
crucifixion. During this time, another Christian leader by the name of Polycarp, who
personally knew the apostle John and other eyewitnesses to Isas teaching, refers to
different Injeel sections some forty times from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and
John. Another Christian leader, Papias, who also knew the apostle John, specifically says
Matthew and Mark wrote the Gospels that bear their name. There are other writings such as
these that validate that there were no issues with the four Gospels being part of the
Injeel as God-inspired scripture. These four Gospels were accepted as the word of God
because they were known to be from the apostles. Other writings about Isas life and
teaching, such as Gospel of Thomas or Gospel of Peter, had not been accepted by the
Christian community as the word of God. These did not make it into the Injeel because
there was no clear witness or evidence that they were written by the apostles whose names
they bear. As I investigated what was done to these other Gospel books that are not part
of the Injeel, I noted that there were no orders given by the Christian leaders to destroy
them. They were simply not used.

As a result of this historical study, I reached a place of understanding
regarding the compilation of the Injeel as follows:

God-inspired apostles wrote accounts of Isas life and message. The writings that
were accepted as scripture were those that the early Christian community accepted as valid
testimony attributable to eyewitnesses of Isas life and teachings.

Christian leadership in the fourth century neither selected nor edited any of the
inspired writings. The Injeel was compiled from what was commonly considered scripture and
accepted as such by the early Christian community.

The Injeel survived the first three centuries in spite of Jewish and Roman authorities
persecuting Christians.

Regarding the charge by some Muslims that the Injeel was the creation of Paul
and Church councils and not Isas teaching, history has shown otherwise. It is true that
human beings will never agree unanimously on anything, not even the Injeel. Some Christian
scholars do not believe everything in the Injeel is part of the life and teachings of Isa.
Sadly, I know that even in the Muslim community there has been concern that ayat from the
Quran were removed that identified Khalifa Ali as the first rightful Khalifa, among other
items. However, the historical fact remains that the compilation of the Injeel had been fixed,
not by councils, but by the witness of the early Christian community who were eyewitness
to Isa and his apostles teachings. The Christian leaders did not create the Injeel,
but rather came to recognize, accept and confirm what was actively taught and preached by
the apostles as the word of God.

Concerning the charge that the Injeel is more like the Hadith but weaker
since it does not have the Isnad, I came to a very different opinion. In my understanding,
the Injeel was more like the Quran, which also does not have any Isnad. The reason that there
is no Isnad for the Quran is that it was compiled only a few years after the death Mohammad,
and eyewitnesses were present to validate what was in the Quran. However, the Isnad was needed
for the Hadith, which were compiled over 150 years after the eyewitnesses had died. Similarly,
based on historical data and the fragments of the Injeel from the first century that still
exist till today, I was able to accept the same for the Injeel as for the Quran, that there
is no need for the Isnad as there were eye witnesses when these were written down.

There are some Christian scholars who believe some of the Injeel is not
attributable to Isa. I discovered that for the majority of them the primary reason for this
thinking is a lack of belief in the supernatural in general and therefore distrust the accounts
of the miraculous events of Isas life. For example, that Isa came from a virgin mother
is discounted as legend. Isa healing the sick or giving life to the dead is considered legend
too. But I believe that God is capable of this and that acts of the supernatural validate
the person being from God. In addition, the Quran also makes similar claims for Isa.
Therefore, I was able to accept that it was not that the scholars had a problem with the
historical witness, but that they had a pre-supposition that would not allow for
supernatural miracles.

Conclusion

In conclusion, for many Muslims, the Quran is the literal word of Allah
and has been perfectly preserved through the ages. Like my other Muslim brothers and sisters
I had started with the belief that the Quran was the word of Allah and that it has been
perfectly compiled but that the Injeel was written by Church Councils and was corrupted.
Muslims make these claims not based on history as I have investigated and discovered, but
purely as a statement of faith. I too made such claims and held such beliefs in my early
life while a Muslim, but when I began to study the history and try to defend that position,
I was forced to come to a very different conclusion. In summary, I came to a place of
understanding the following key points regarding the compilation of the Quran and Injeel:

This authoritative text of the Quran was not compiled by Mohammad, but made such by
the order of Khalifa Abu Bakr and subsequently by the order of Khalifa Uthman.

Khalifa Uthman ordered the destruction of all competing Quran manuscripts; even from
those that Mohammad had recommended were the best teachers of the Quran.

The historical evidence shows that there were many challenges involved in finalizing
what we have today as the authoritative Quran. The evidence also shows that the
compilation of the authoritative Quran was a process that took place during the
Khalifas reign.

The Injeel was not written by Isa, but by his apostles and their close associates based
on Isas teachings.

Of the 27 books of the Injeel, 20 were accepted within the first century to be inspired,
however the other 7 were not until much later as there was doubt if these 7 were written
or taught by the apostles.

The books that make up the Injeel were not put into a standard compilation until the
councils did this in the fourth century. However, historical evidence is clear that the
Christian community who bore witness to the teachings of Isa and apostles used these
writings as God inspired scripture during the life of the apostles in the first century.

At this point I was satisfied that I had unjustly denied myself a serious study
of the Injeel due to fear that it was not the teachings of Isa, but of Paul and Church Councils.
During this time my position on the Quran and Injeel reversed. The compilation of the
Quran was more questionable as it had evolved, first into the Hafsa manuscript and later
to the Khalifa Uthman manuscript, while the other Quran manuscripts that were in use were
destroyed. I was now more troubled about the authoritativeness of the Quran and questioned
its trustworthiness more than that of the Injeel. I continued to seek Gods guidance,
this time setting the Quran aside and spending more time in the Injeel, focusing on the
Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to see what God had inspired before the advent of
Islam.

If you would like to send me your comments or questions, please
write to me.